There is one main assessment of the sensuous beauty that is art in KeatsÆ (1819) Ode to a Grecian Urn: ôBeauty is truth, truth beauty,--that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to knowö (2). KeatsÆ aesthetic of art viewed art as having the capacity to capture the eternal and universal essence of life. In the sensuous beauty of art like the urn, one finds the essence of beauty and the essence of truth which are interchangeable. From the imagination of the artist springs beauty and truth, the essence of living, which the speaker informs us is all we can ôknow on earthö as well as ôall we need to knowö (Keats 1819, 2). KeatsÆ aesthetic of manmade material objects stands in contrast to WordsworthÆs focus on nature as the source of all we can know and all we need to know on earth. KeatsÆ aesthetic also posits more capacity to know beauty and truth than does the aesthetic provided by KantÆs (1795) Perpetual Peace, which puts limitations on human reason to know a ôHigher Cause,ö as does Mary ShelleyÆs (1992) Frankenstein. This analysis will compare KeatsÆ aesthetic of art to those offered by Wordsworth, Kant, and Shelley.
In Ode, Keats attempts to make the case that the artistic imagination reveals beauty and, therefore, truth because the artistic imagination captures the essence of life frozen in time in art. We see this most clearly in KeatsÆ depiction of the real life couple depicted on the urn with their depiction. Human beings are mortal. Art is immortal. The speaker informs us that the beauty and essence of life, the ôtruth,ö of the love and joy shared between the couple in real life is gone, ôàthou canst not leave / They song, nor ever can those trees be bare; / Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss, / Though winning near the goal yetö (Keats 1819, 1).
Despite the fact that the real moment of existence between the loversÆ is gone, the essence of that moment, the essence that is the bea...